The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1887-03-03

We have read with no little interest a
very able article in the last issue Of our
esteemed contemporary, the Valley Virgin
a0a, on the subject of the state debt. But,
for the life of us, we can't tell whether
the VirgiaSala is willing to offer to pay the
creditors more than is provided for by the
Riddleberger settlement, or to agree to
pay more if the creditor asks it. Y ct this
is the all-important question at this time.
Will our esteemed contemporary kindly
enlighten US ?-R6c7tnaoaad State.
We are not in favor of paying more than
the Riddleberger bill states, because we
believe that is fair presentation of the
debt. The only objection we ever urged
against that formulation was the interest
rate, because we thought, and now think,
that the reduction from per cent, which
the State contracted to pay when she bur-
rowed the money the original bonds repre-
scented, to 3 per cent, was repudiation to
that extent. But the Riddleberger kill
itself was mere statement, with no inhe-
rent power of enforcement. 1t was the
auxiliary legislation which gave it vitality
and was to make it effective, and that has
been practically repealed by the legislature
of 1884 The Riddleberger bill and the
coupon killers were the plan proposed to
coerce the creditors into refunding in the
bonds provided for under that legislation,
and the repeal of the effective portion
of the plan, virtually destroyed the plan
itself. Everything is at sea now, for to
insist upon the Riddleberger settlement
with its vital force eliminated, would be
futile, especially after the legislation which
had been sustained by the Supreme Court,
has been repealed. and the same supreme
judicial authority has pronounced the sub
stituted legislation unconstitutional, and
decreed that the coupons must be received
for all taxes, dues and demands owed to
the State. The holders of the tax-receiv-
able coupon bonds, issued under the legis-
lation of 1871 and 1879, being thus fortified,
it is useless to talk about the Riddleberger
bill, with its enforcingsmeasure repealed,
other than as statement of the debt. In
this condition of things, to our mind, the
plain duty as well as policy is to meet the
creditors in conference, and see whether
an agreement cannot be made for an adj
justment of q controversy that is ruinous
to both the creditors and the State, upon
basis Of the present rate Of taxation ard
the present revenues. We may all con-
tend and honestly believe that the Riddle
berger formulation is a just presentation
of the debt the State really owes. But 1t
must not be forgotten that the creditors
hold another statement made by the State
through her representatives in the Legis-
lature. which differs from the Riddleber-
ger bill, and which has been declared a
contract, in the form the Legislature made
| it, by the Supreme Court of the United
States, which our State constitution and
| the Constitution of the United States say
cannot be violated. The creditors have
| the deliberate enactment of the State,
| fortified by the United States Supreme
| Court, to place against a simple legisla-
| tive enactment embracing an arithm etical
calculation, with no power to enforce it,
as the case now stands. Are we to con-
tinue this unequal controversy, which is
bringing ruin and disgrace upon the Com
monwealth, as well as imposing loss upon
the creditors, or should there be made a
manly, honest effort to adjust the differ
ences upon basis mutually acceptable and
mutually advantageous? The exasperat-
ing, wasting legislation which has been
going On for-the past few years. between
the creditors, substantially, and the State,
is working harm to Virginia that cannot
be computed in figures, while the credit
ors are suffering pecunlary loss, with no
other compensation than the qualification
of success upon controverted legal points.
No body is gaining anything except the
lawyers. 1t seems to US it is about time this
foolishness were stopped and that the prin-
cipals to the contention come together on
business principles and for business pur-
poses. and settle the matter. This
could be done if common sense would
prevail, without imposing upon the people
any additional burdens to those they now
bear.
We have not confined our response to
the question of our contemporary to mere
categorical answer. We have chosen to
enlarge upon it for the reason that there is
a popular impression that the Riddleber-
ger bill has some inherent vitality by which
it can enforce itself or that there is some
power to compel its acceptance by the
creditors. That is not the case. The es-
sential legislation that was designed to
make the Riddleberger calculation effec-
tive, has been practically destroyed, while
the legislation substituted for it is null
and void. So the statement of that bill
stands by itself, and has no more force than
any other presentation claiming to give the
actual debt of Virginia. The creditors
have not only a statement from the same
authority-the Legislature of the State
which differs from the Riddleberger for
mutation, but they have it in form, so
| far as the coupon bonds are concerned,
that the courts have clinched, and there is
no practical way to evade it, as the matter
now stands, without their consent. This
view of the case cannot be ignored. Popu-
lar clamor, nor newspaper diatribes cannot
change it. so long as law and the decisions
of the highest judicial authority are recog
nized and respected. And when we cease
to do this, we place ourselves outside of
the pale of organized society, and invite
revolution and anarchy. The laws are not
made of straws to be broken at will, nor
are the determinations of the Courts to be
nulliied at the behest of political caucus
or to subserve the exgencies of a desper-
ate political faction.
Ii an extra session of Congress should
be called, it will be due to the course of
Mr.. Randall, as Chairman of the Ways and
Means Committee. Important appropria-
tion bills have been held back to the last
10